Present for the Conservation Commission and attending the meeting were: Pam Goff, Bruce Bartels, David Flanders, Virginia Dyer, Russell Maloney, Rusty Walton and PersonNameChuck Hodgkinson. Reid Silva, John Abrams and Laurel Wilkinson also attended. Richard Steves and PersonNameRay Kellman were absent.
Ms. Goff opened the meeting at 1:30 PM to announce site visits to 157 North Rd.; AP 4-22.2 and 2 Chocker’s Lane; AP 33-4.
JOHN ABRAMS AND LAUREL WILKINSON FOR DIANA T. VAGELOS, TRUSTEE; NOI SE 12 – 553; AP 4-22.2: As acting chair Ms. Goff opened the public hearing at 2:20 PM. Mr. Abrams summarized the site plan to extend the existing covered porch with a new section that is 8 feet wide and 26’ 4” long. It will be placed on the northeast side of the existing beach house. There will be no screens or windows. Ms. Goff read the Town’s wetland by-law. After confirming the results of the Conservation Officer’s soil samples taken during the site visit it was agreed the area affected by the plan is an upland section and
buffer zone of an eroding coastal bank. The definition and contributing values for this resource were also read aloud for the record. The regulations for this area and the relevant portion of Section 5.01 outlining the conditions that might allow a waiver were also discussed.
Ms. Goff then asked if a smaller length of covered porch would be acceptable as it would reduce the addition’s impact on the upland scrub vegetation. Mr. Abrams thought the porch could be reduced to less than 16 feet in length which would have it end just past the existing window.
After further discussion a motion was made to close the hearing at 2:50 PM. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved. A subsequent motion was made to approve a revised plan for a covered porch that is 8 feet wide and less than 16 feet long. The motion was seconded. Ms. Goff commented that this compromise would probably have no adverse impact on the resource’s contributing values of storm damage prevention, wildlife habitat or the historic views. Mr. Bartels added that he supports the proposal. The motion passed with a vote of three in favor and two opposed (Ms. Dyer and Mr. Maloney). The applicant agreed to provide a revised site plan.
REID SILVA FOR RICHARD SCHEUER AND AMY COHEN; NOI SE 12 – 552; AP 33-4: Ms. Goff opened the public hearing at 2:55 PM. Mr. Silva outlined the site plan for the proposed driveway, trench for utility lines and the installation of a well. Portions of the work go through a wetland and a section of the wetland buffer zone. A culvert is proposed for the driveway section that crosses the wetland.
Ms. Goff read the DEP comment that asks if an alternate route might be available that has less impact on the resource and the comments from the NHESP requiring a full placeCityMESA review before any work can begin. Ms. Goff then asked if there is an alternative to the proposed plan.
Mr. Silva outlined the Town’s zoning regulations that do not allow a second driveway entrance that is less than 1000 feet from the nearest driveway on lots that are in a Roadside District. This is a District of Critical Planning Concern (DCPC) as determined by the placeMartha’s Vineyard Commission (MVC). A zoning variance -- rather than a Special Permit -- would be required to obtain a permit for a driveway that is less than 1000 feet from an existing entrance. Mr. Silva explained that zoning variances are granted when certain hardship conditions exist. Variances are also precedent setting decisions and therefore very difficult to obtain. Mr. Walton added that using the other existing driveway to the west would probably cause more disturbances to the resource area than the proposed solution
because of an existing perennial stream that would need to be crossed.
The Commission then reviewed the various alternatives for protecting the wetland if the current proposal were executed – a round or box culvert versus a bridge. Mr. Silva thought a bridge would cause more disturbance than a culvert. Bridges are generally used to cross running water resources. This area is a wetland with no water flow.
Mr. Maloney asked if the applicant should first try to obtain the permits for creating a new entrance off addressStreetState Road that does not impact the resource area before approving this plan. If no alternative entrance is possible then the Commission can consider approving this plan with either a culvert or bridge for the section crossing the wetland.
After further discussion the applicant requested a continuation to discuss the alternatives with his client and determine if a zoning variance is a feasible option. He did not know how long it would take to do the required research. A motion to accept the request was made, seconded and unanimously approved.
RFD MICHAEL LIEBERMAN; AP 27.1-109: Mr. Walton informed the Commission that Mr. Lieberman changed his plan and wishes to withdraw his Request for Determination of Applicability. The Commission will accept the request once it is received in writing.
RFD ABUTTER JANE WILKIE FOR AP 24-213: This application is submitted by an abutter to a vacant lot. The current property owner, Margaret Gifford has applied to the Board of Health for a six bedroom septic system and well with the goal of making it a buildable, water front lot on Chilmark Pond. The Commission reviewed the boundaries of the 100-year flood zone and shore zone. The proposed well, waterline and part of the proposed house are within the 100-year flood zone and subject to jurisdiction under the Commonwealth’s Wetland Protection Act. The Town’s by-law adds a 100-foot buffer zone beyond the limit of the 100-year flood zone. After brief discussion a motion was made for a positive determination of the proposal that falls under both the Commonwealth’s and Town’s legislation. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved.
NOI SE 12 – 550; AP 26-31.1, 31.2 AND 31.3: Chuck H. read a letter from the applicant requesting a continuation of this hearing from April 16th to the fall of 2008. This will allow additional time to evaluate the possible presence of a vernal pool. The applicant will inform all abutters in writing of the delay. A separate letter will be sent to all abutters at least one month ahead of time informing them of the hearing’s new date and time once it is determined. A motion was made to accept the request. The motion was seconded and unanimously approved.
RUSTY WALTON UPDATES: Mr. Walton summarized the site visit and subsequent letter provided by Tea Lane Nursery to remove cut vegetation on AP 26-15.1 and 15.2. A Notice of Intent and re-vegetation plan will be submitted to replace the vegetation that was mistakenly removed on Mr. Berger’s property.
ADMINISTRATION: The meeting minutes for February 6 were reviewed. A motion to approve the minutes as presented was made, seconded and approved by consensus.
Letter: AP 33-57; Graeme Flanders legal counsel: The Commission reviewed a letter dated March 28, 2008 requesting its opinion on a wire agricultural fence with posts that was installed on AP 33-57. Mr. Walton summarized his assessment and shared pictures taken of the fence. After discussion the Commission agreed a Request for Determination of Applicability should be filed. Mr. Walton will respond to the letter.
The following documents were signed and notarized as needed:
Determination of Applicability for AP 24-213.
Certificate of Compliance SE 12 – 436; AP 32-68.1.
Certificate of Compliance SE 12 – 353; AP 32-68.1.
Certificate of Compliance SE 12 – 529; AP 11-23.1.
With no further business to conduct the meeting adjourned at 4:00 PM.
Respectfully submitted by PersonNameChuck Hodgkinson, C.A.S.
| 
